The Trump DOJ retribution tour has begun, as Ed Martin, Trump’s interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia, launches a series of politically motivated investigations targeting critics of Trump and Elon Musk. Martin, a former talk radio host and “Stop the Steal” supporter with no prosecutorial experience, is transforming what should be an independent office into what appears to be a personal intimidation squad.
After years of baselessly crying “lawfare” over legitimate investigations into January 6th and other matters, MAGA Republicans are now demonstrating what actual politically motivated investigations look like. This is after Trump-fluffing media like the National Review declared upon Trump’s election victory that it would lead to “the end of lawfare.”
Not surprisingly, we’re seeing the reverse. There are too many examples to cover right now, as the whole of the MAGA movement in government, including at both the FTC and FCC, appear to be engaging in frivolous lawfare to attack and harass those who are insufficiently sycophantic towards Trump and Elon Musk. And Ed Martin seems to be leading the pack.
For what it’s worth, Martin has no background as a prosecutor. He was one of those rightwing talk radio hosts for many years as well as an occasional (unsuccessful) candidate for political office. He was one of the foolish “stop the steal” supporters who has admitted to being at the Capitol on January 6th in 2021, and claimed that what happened there was “nothing out of hand.” As a lawyer, he represented some of the January 6th defendants, raising some ethical eyebrows as one of his first moves as US Attorney was to move to dismiss a case against a defendant he himself represented. This has already resulted in a bar complaint.
But Martin’s most concerning actions involve his apparent eagerness to serve as a personal attack dog for the administration. Soon after criticism of Musk’s DOGE initiative began mounting, Martin sent a particularly stupid letter to Musk and Steve Davis (one of Musk’s inner circle hatchet men), saying that he would “chase… to the end of the Earth to hold… accountable” anyone who “acted simply unethically” in regards to the government smashing that DOGE was doing.
If you can’t see the image, the text reads:
Dear Steve & Elon,
Thank you for the referral of individuals and networks who appear to be stealing government property and/or threatening government employees. After your referral, as is my practice, I will begin an inquiry.
Please let me reiterate again: if people are discovered to have broken the law or even acted simply unethically, we will investigate them and we will chase them to the end of the Earth to hold them accountable. We will not rest or cease in this. No one should abuse American taxpayer dollars nor American taxpayer workers. Noone is above the law.
I am proud that we have been able to assist local law-enforcement in protecting the DOGE workers and others over the past week or so. A safe DC is a priority for President Trump and all of us.
Please keep in touch and continue to refer matters to me as soon as possible.
All the best.
Edward R. Martin, Jr
Setting aside Martin’s peculiar spelling choices, his letter represents a fundamental misunderstanding (or deliberate misuse) of the DOJ’s role and constitutional limitations. The DOJ is not supposed to be the personal Gestapo of anyone in the executive branch, though Martin clearly feels otherwise. Indeed, he claimed that part of the job of his office is to “protect DOGE” and “federal workers,” which seems like an odd thing to say as it is DOGE and Musk who are going around threatening and firing federal workers:
In an email obtained by Rolling Stone, former “Stop the Steal” organizer turned interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin claimed that members of Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) were receiving “despicable” threats.
“We are the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s office; we are the guardians of federal workers. You and I must do whatever possible to ensure that government work is safe for all involved,” Martin wrote Wednesday, as his boss dubiously and unceremoniously fires tens of thousands of federal workers en masse, with little oversight, accountability, or rationale.
But Martin’s most dangerous overreach is his attempt to criminalize what he calls “simply unethical” behavior — a standard that exists nowhere in federal law and would violate basic First Amendment principles. While there are narrow exceptions for “true threats,” decades of Supreme Court precedent has carefully limited the government’s ability to punish speech.
As just one example, in the US v. Bagdasarian, the courts determined that truly horrendous speech from someone who said that President Obama should be shot (in much more graphic and problematic language) was not a true threat. To be a “true threat” speech has to show an actual “intent to commit an act of unlawful violence.”
Yet Martin seems determined to ignore these well-established constitutional boundaries. Instead, he’s ramped up these politically motivated intimidation tactics, with what he’s calling “Project Whirlwind.” This is a silly name for what appears to be a plan to open frivolous investigations into Democrats who criticize Trump or Musk, falsely claiming they are “threats.”
This is simple intimidation lawfare tactics of a political goon, given too much power. He kicked off this campaign with letters to Senator Chuck Schumer and Rep. Robert Garcia, claiming to be “letter of inquiry after request” which is not an actual thing.
The absurdity of Martin’s campaign is perfectly illustrated by his letter to Rep. Garcia. Garcia’s supposed “threat” consisted of calling Musk a “dick” on CNN and using an obvious metaphor about bringing “weapons to this bar fight” while discussing Congress’s role in protecting democracy. Any first-year law student could tell you this is constitutionally protected speech, yet Martin treated it as grounds for a federal investigation.
No one in their right mind would think that’s a threat, true or not. But Martin uses it to threaten Garcia with an investigation:
Dear Rep. Garcia:
As United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. I receive requests for information and clarification. I take these requests seriously and act on them with letters like this one you are receiving.
At this time, I respectfully request that you clarify your comments from February 12, 2025. During a live interview with CNN, when asked how Democrats can stop Elon Musk, you spoke clearly: “What the American public wants is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight. This is an actual fight for democracy.”
This sounds to some like a threat to Mr. Musk – an appointed representative of President Donald Trump who you call a “dick” and government staff who work for him. Their concerns have led to this inquiry.
We take threats against public officials very seriously. I look forward to your cooperation with my letter of inquiry after request. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Please respond by February 24, 2025. Should you have further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call my office or schedule a time to meet in person.
All the best.
If the Garcia investigation seems like overreach, Martin’s pursuit of Chuck Schumer ventures into the realm of the absurd. Martin is attempting to investigate five-year-old comments Schumer made during a rally at the Supreme Court in support of Roe v. Wade (before the Court overturned it) — comments that have already been publicly debated and for which Schumer previously apologized. Schumer’s comments were pretty mild, to be honest, and clearly did not rise to the level of true threats:
Schumer, D-N.Y., suggested that President Donald Trump’s court appointees, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, “won’t know what hit” them if they vote to uphold abortion restrictions. He spoke during a rally on the sidewalk in front of the court building.
“I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer said.
Martin’s choice of “Project Whirlwind” as a name — clearly meant to mock Schumer’s five-year-old “whirlwind” comment — reveals both the pettiness and political motivation behind these investigations. Martin sent a series of letters to Schumer demanding he explain himself, saying “no one is above the law.” Even while Schumer’s office did respond to Martin saying (accurately) that his comments were “not a threat to physically harm any person,” Martin still sent another letter nearly a week later falsely claiming that Schumer never responded. Hilariously, Martin says:
You have failed to respond which is a personal disappointment and professionally unacceptable.
Martin’s performative outrage over a “personal disappointment” would be comical if it weren’t so dangerous. His willingness to investigate five-year-old comments that resulted in exactly zero acts of violence demonstrates this isn’t about public safety — it’s about intimidation.
The real “professionally unacceptable” behavior here is Martin’s transformation of the DC US Attorney’s office into a political weapon aimed at critics of the administration. Indeed, not that they care, but Martin’s actions quite clearly violate the Trump Executive Order “ending federal censorship” which declares that no federal government employee should engage in “any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”
There may be a silver lining to Martin’s amateurish, heavy-handed approach. As former Justice Department prosecutor Brendan Ballou points out, Martin’s obvious political motivations and incompetence might be his undoing.
Because of Martin’s inexperience, he will need to persuade someone in his office to carry out his projects. Thus far, he seems to have done a terrible job of ingratiating himself to others: Most recently, the office’s top criminal prosecutor resigned rather than follow his allegedly improper orders. One former prosecutor in the office said, “He’s a fantastically bad manager—a tone deaf bully who inspires ridicule rather than trust.” Perhaps as a result, Martin’s officewide emails are often leaked, including a message complaining about leaks.
And this is where public discontent can play a role. The more unpopular Martin’s unethical or illegal schemes can be made, the less likely it is that he will find lawyers willing to implement them. The more unpopular his plans, the less likely he will be to receive the permanent position: If the Senate does not confirm Martin within 120 days of his interim appointment, the D.C. court may choose a replacement until the body acts.
The public should continue to speak out—in articles, in protests, and in tweets. Former leaders of the U.S. attorney’s office should talk too. They may be reluctant to criticize Martin’s most egregious actions, for fear of seeming to politicize the work of the office. But that work is already being politicized, and former senior prosecutors can speak to returning the office to the best of what it was and can be again.
The MAGA movement’s hypocrisy is so blatant and so obvious that they don’t seem to care much if anyone realizes they’re absolutely and gleefully doing the very kinds of things they falsely accused the Biden administration of doing.
But for people who live in reality, it is important not to look away from what they’re doing and to call out the truth.
Filed Under: chuck schumer, dc, doj, donald trump, ed martin, elon musk, free speech, project whirlwind, robert garcia, true threats, unethical
